It was a busy week for patent filings in the district courts, with 113 complaints filed, fueled particularly by nearly 50 (!) IP Edge complaints, primarily filed in the Western District of Texas’s Waco Division; the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB), on the other hand, was slightly down, with 29—the bulk coming from Intel counterpunching with seven challenges against AQUIS-asserted patents.
Second Mystery Entity Files IPR on VLSI Patents: A second unknown LLC of recent vintage has filed an IPR challenge against the patents that formed the basis of the recent $2.18 billion judgment against Intel in Judge Albright’s court. The first, OpenSky, LLC, effectively copied earlier challenges by Intel—ones denied under Fintiv for a trial date that was pushed back but eventually led to the judgment. This second, Patent Quality Assurance, LLC, appears to be tied to Austin-area former Baker Botts lawyers, but is of murky origin. The petition purports to fix problems with the OpenSky petition (namely, the retention of different testifying experts) and begs institution over the other. Motivations remain murky, but one can imagine the value attached to having the Office hear the challenge on the merits.
K.Mizra NPE expands, targets ISPs: A set of patents of older non-practicing entity (NPE) vintage, but newer ownership/management, has moved on to target the big four major U.S internet service providers, namely AT&T, Sprint, T-Mobile, and Verizon. The patents’ disclosure, while using oddly cryptic nomenclature, includes relatively short claims directed to generic base station communication. The patent has previously been asserted against others. The patents and K.Mizra’s pedigree include another subsidiary, Ginegar IP, and patents collected from Daedalus Blue and other NPE entities; K.Mizra appears to be a foreign-owned entity controlled by Charles Jourdan Hausman.
IP Edge Files Almost 50: By my count, known IP Edge subsidiaries this week filed 47 complaints—almost half of all district court filings—including newer entities like Orbit Licensing, which is asserting patents licensed from Chinese company Huawei against U.S. companies. Those subsidiaries include Swirlate IP LLC, Altair Logix LLC, Crimson IP LLC, Orbit Licensing, Invincible IP, Lecrew Licensing LLC, Mellaconic IP LLC, Tunnel IP LLC, and more; most follow the single patent file-and-settle strategy, though there is some evidence (such as with Orbit Licensing) that IP Edge is changing strategies and investing in bigger portfolios, including a number of IP Bridge-transferred patents.
PTAB (29)
Case Number | Action | Owner | Petitioner | Patent |
IPR2021-01024 | Filed | Ch?gai Seiyaku Kabushiki Gaisha | Fresenius Kabi USA, LLC Fresenius Kabi Swissbiosim Gmbh |
7521052 |
IPR2021-01207 | Filed | Varta Microbattery Gmbh [Michael Tojner, PhD, LLD] | Guangdong Mic-Power New Energy Co., Ltd. Peag LLC (d/b/a JLAB Audio) Audio Partnership LLC Audio Partnership PLC (d/b/a Cambridge Audio) GN Audio A/S AND GN Audio USA INC. d/b/a Jabra |
10804506 |
IPR2021-01204 | Filed | Medy-Tox, Inc. | Revance Therapeutics, Inc. | 9480731 |
IPR2021-01161 | Filed | Neodron Ltd. [Magnetar Capital, Atlantic IP] | STMicroelectronics, Inc. | 8749251 |
IPR2021-01191 | Filed | WSOU Investments, LLC d/b/a Brazos Licensing and Development [WSOU Holdings, LLC; Craig Etchegoyen] | Unified Patents, LLC | 7333770 |
IPR2021-01145 | Filed | Express Mobile, Inc. | SAP America, Inc. | 9471287 |
IPR2021-01093 | Filed | Acqis LLC [Acqis Technology Incorporated, William Chu] | Intel Corporation | 8626977 |
IPR2021-01066 | Filed | U.S. Well Services, LLC | Halliburton Energy Services, Inc. | 10020711 |
IPR2021-01114 | Filed | Acqis LLC [Acqis Technology Incorporated, William Chu] | Intel Corporation | RE44654 |
IPR2021-01205 | Filed | Blue Yonder Group Inc. [RedPrairie Holding Incorporated] | Kinaxis Corp | 7050874 |
IPR2021-01206 | Filed | Varta Microbattery Gmbh [Michael Tojner, PhD, LLD] | Guangdong Mic-Power New Energy Co., Ltd. Peag LLC (d/b/a JLAB Audio) Audio Partnership PLC (d/b/a Cambridge Audio) GN Audio A/S AND GN Audio USA INC. d/b/a Jabra |
10971776 |
IPR2021-01113 | Filed | Acqis LLC [Acqis Technology Incorporated, William Chu] | Intel Corporation | RE44654 |
IPR2021-01057 | Filed | Japan Display Inc. | Tianma Micro-electronics Co., Ltd. | 7385665 |
IPR2021-01144 | Filed | Express Mobile, Inc. | SAP America, Inc. | 9063755 |
IPR2021-01099 | Filed | Acqis LLC [Acqis Technology Incorporated, William Chu] | Intel Corporation | 9529769 |
IPR2021-01196 | Filed | Asetek Danmark A/S | CoolIT Systems, Inc. | 10599196 |
IPR2021-01025 | Filed | Ch?gai Seiyaku Kabushiki Gaisha | Fresenius Kabi USA, LLC Fresenius Kabi Swissbiosim Gmbh |
10744201 |
IPR2021-01160 | Filed | Neodron Ltd. [Magentar Capital, Atlantic IP] | STMicroelectronics, Inc. | 8749251 |
IPR2021-01203 | Filed | Medy-Tox, Inc. | Revance Therapeutics, Inc. | 9480731 |
IPR2021-01102 | Filed | Acqis LLC [Acqis Technology Incorporated, William Chu] | Intel Corporation | RE44739 |
IPR2021-01059 | Filed | Japan Display Inc. | Tianma Micro-electronics Co., Ltd. | 8830409 |
IPR2021-01197 | Filed | Bard Peripheral Vascular, Inc | Atrium Medical Corporation | 7959615 |
IPR2021-01198 | Filed | International Business Machines Corporation | Chewy, Inc | 6704034 |
IPR2021-01202 | Filed | Sage Products, LLC [Sage Products, Inc.] | Becton, Dickinson and Company | 10688067 |
IPR2021-01201 | Filed | Sage Products, LLC [Sage Products, Inc.] | Becton, Dickinson and Company | 10398642 |
IPR2021-01214 | Filed | Macroair Technologies, Inc, | Delta T, LLC [Spectris PLLC] | 8579588 |
IPR2021-01146 | Filed | Express Mobile, Inc. | SAP America, Inc. | 9928044 |
IPR2021-01095 | Filed | Acqis LLC [Acqis Technology Incorporated, William Chu] | Intel Corporation | 8756359 |
IPR2021-01094 | Filed | Acqis LLC [Acqis Technology Incorporated, William Chu] | Intel Corporation | 8756359 |
IPR2021-00341 | Not Instituted – Merits | Ethanol Boosting Systems, LLC Massachusetts Institute of Technology |
Ford Motor Company | 9708965 |
IPR2021-00339 | Not Instituted – Merits | Massachusetts Institute of Technology Ethanol Boosting Systems, LLC |
Ford Motor Company | 10619580 |
IPR2021-00227 | Not Instituted – Merits | WSOU Investments, LLC d/b/a Brazos Licensing and Development [WSOU Holdings, LLC; Craig Etchegoyen] | Huawei Technologies Co., Ltd. | 9084199 |
IPR2021-00410 | Not Instituted – Merits | Fundamental Innovation Systems International LLC [Fundamental Innovation Systems International Holdings LLC, Centerbridge Partners] | TCT Mobile US Inc. TCT Mobile US Holdings Inc. Huizhou TCL Mobile Communication Co. Ltd. TCL Communication, Inc. |
6936936 |
IPR2021-00340 | Not Instituted – Merits | Massachusetts Institute of Technology Ethanol Boosting Systems, LLC |
Ford Motor Company | 10781760 |
IPR2021-00229 | Instituted | WSOU Investments, LLC d/b/a Brazos Licensing and Development [WSOU Holdings, LLC; Craig Etchegoyen] | Huawei Technologies Co., Ltd. Huawei Device USA Inc. Huawei Technologies USA, Inc. Huawei Investment & Holding Co Ltd Huawei Device (Shenzhen) Co.,Ltd. |
8429480 |
IPR2021-00335 | Instituted | GUI Global Products, Ltd., D/B/A Gwee [GUI Global Management, LLC] | Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd Samsung Electronics America, Inc. |
10259020 |
IPR2021-00272 | Instituted | WSOU Investments, LLC d/b/a Brazos Licensing and Development [WSOU Holdings, LLC; Craig Etchegoyen] | Dell Technologies Inc. Dell, Inc. EMC Corporation |
8913489 |
IPR2021-00338 | Instituted | GUI Global Products, Ltd., D/B/A Gwee [GUI Global Management, LLC] | Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd Samsung Electronics America, Inc. |
10589320 |
IPR2021-00311 | Instituted | AutoStore Technology AS | Ocado Group PLC | 10474140 |
IPR2021-00336 | Instituted | GUI Global Products, Ltd., D/B/A Gwee [GUI Global Management, LLC] | Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd Samsung Electronics America, Inc. |
10259021 |
IPR2021-00293 | Instituted | C. A. Casyso GMBH | HemoSonics LLC | 10746750 |
IPR2021-00337 | Instituted | GUI Global Products, Ltd., D/B/A Gwee [GUI Global Management, LLC] | Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd Samsung Electronics America, Inc. |
10562077 |
IPR2021-00381 | Instituted | Koss Corporation | Apple, Inc | 10491982 |
IPR2020-01473 | Adverse Judgment | Dali Wireless Inc. | CommScope Technologies LLC | 10080178 |
IPR2020-01476 | Adverse Judgment | Dali Wireless Inc. | CommScope Technologies LLC | 9847816 |
IPR2020-01408 | Adverse Judgment | Dali Wireless Inc. | CommScope Technologies LLC | 10045314 |
IPR2020-00352 | Final Written Decision | Velos Media, LLC [Inception Holdings, LLC, various] | Unified Patents, LLC | 9414066 |
IPR2020-00345 | Final Written Decision | Remote Imaging Solutions LLC [Endpoint IP] | DJI Technology, Inc. | 8918230 |
IPR2020-00476 | Final Written Decision | Cellect, LLC [Micro-Imaging Solutions, LLC (f/k/a Micro-Imaging Solutions, Inc.; f/k/a Micro-Medical Devices, Inc.] | Samsung Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd Samsung Electronics America, Inc. |
9198565 |
IPR2020-00323 | Final Written Decision | Trusted Knight Corporation | IBM Corporation | 9503473 |
IPR2020-00353 | Final Written Decision | Hanwha Q Cells & Advanced Materials Corp. | LONGi Solar Technology K.K. LONGi Green Energy Technology Co., LTD. LONGI (H.K.) TRADING LTD. LONGI (KUCHING) SDN. BHD. LONGI SOLAR TECHNOLOGY (TAIZHOU) CO., LTD. |
8933525 |
IPR2020-00360 | Final Written Decision | No Spill Inc. NSIP Holdings LLC |
Scepter Canada, Inc Myers Industries, Inc |
10029132 |
District Court (113)
Case Number | Action | Plaintiff | Defendant | Patent |
1:21-cv-00917 | Filed | Swirlate IP LLC [IP Edge] | Sensitech Inc. | 7154861 7567622 |
1:21-cv-00919 | Filed | Altair Logix LLC [IP Edge] | Spreadtrum Communications USA Inc. | 6289434 |
2:21-cv-05278 | Filed | BelAir Electronics, Inc. | Valfre, LLC | 7941195 10097676 |
2:21-cv-00238 | Filed | RightQuestion, LLC [Bjorn Markus Jakobsson] | Samsung Group | 10824696 10929512 |
1:21-cv-00929 | Filed | PF Prism IMB BV; Warner-Lambert Co. LLC; Pfizer | Qilu Pharmaceutical Co., Ltd. | 10723730 |
1:21-cv-00930 | Filed | Crimson IP LLC [IP Edge] | Enghouse Networks (US) Inc. | 8868070 |
1:21-cv-00932 | Filed | Crimson IP LLC [IP Edge] | Mobileum, Inc. | 8868070 |
1:21-cv-00934 | Filed | Crimson IP LLC [IP Edge] | Valid Secure Packaging, LLC | 8868070 |
1:21-cv-00935 | Filed | Heritage IP LLC [IP Edge] | Boston Scientific Corp. | 6854067 |
6:21-cv-00686 | Filed | Decapolis Systems, LLC [Raymond Anthony Joao] | Conceptual Mindworks, Inc. | 7490048 7464040 |
5:21-cv-05078 | Filed | AT&T Services, Inc AT&T, Inc. |
Voip-Pal.com, Inc. | 10880721 8630234 |
1:21-cv-03508 | Filed | Hydro Net LLC | Winegard Co | 7187706 |
1:21-cv-00951 | Filed | AO Smith Corporation AOS Holding Company |
Water Heating Technologies Corp. Ariston Thermo USA, LLC |
8375897 |
1:21-cv-00954 | Filed | Invincible IP, LLC [IP Edge] | Citrix Systems, Inc. | 9635134 9479472 8938634 9678774 8954993 |
1:21-cv-00955 | Filed | Invincible IP, LLC [IP Edge] | Nutanix, Inc. | 9635134 8938634 9678774 |
1:21-cv-00964 | Filed | Orbit Licensing LLC [IP Edge] | OnApp, Inc. | 9497035 9578040 |
6:21-cv-00690 | Filed | DexCom, Inc. | Abbott Laboratories Abbott Diabetes Care Sales Corp. |
10980452 10702193 10702215 10993642 11000213 |
1:21-cv-00968 | Filed | P Tech, LLC | Arthrex, Inc. | 10517584 10881440 10376259 9814453 9999449 9579129 |
1:21-cv-00916 | Filed | Swirlate IP LLC [IP Edge] | Ametek, Inc. | 7154861 7567622 |
6:21-cv-00681 | Filed | Xiros, Ltd. | DePuy Synthes, Inc. Medical Device Business Services, Inc. DePuy Synthes Sales, Inc. Chad Connor, M.D. Depuy Orthopaedics, Inc. et al. |
10835266 9125674 10835265 9265511 |
8:21-cv-01133 | Filed | Hyper Ice, Inc, | MerchSource, LLC | 10912708 |
1:21-cv-00926 | Filed | Digital Cache, LLC [Oso IP, LLC] | NetApp, Inc. | 6851015 |
1:21-cv-00942 | Filed | Lecrew Licensing LLC [IP Edge] | Sonos | 9516370 |
1:21-cv-00945 | Filed | Mellaconic IP LLC [IP Edge] | Fantasia Trading, LLC | 9986435 |
1:21-cv-01774 | Filed | Tunnel IP LLC [IP Edge] | QSC, LLC | 7916877 |
1:21-cv-01922 | Filed | Amphastar Pharmaceuticals Inc. | Eli Lilly & Co. | 7517334 |
2:21-cv-05300 | Filed | Infinilux Corporation | Nicor, Inc. | |
1:21-cv-00952 | Filed | Cephalon, Inc. Eagle Pharmaceuticals, Inc Teva Pharmaceuticals International GmbH |
Accord Healthcare Intas Biopharmaceuticals |
9034908 9144568 9579384 9597399 9572887 9572797 9265831 9572796 9000021 8609707 10052385 9597398 10010533 9597397 |
1:21-cv-00953 | Filed | Orbit Licensing LLC [IP Edge] | Wowza Media System, LLC | 9497035 9578040 |
1:21-cv-00956 | Filed | Invincible IP, LLC [IP Edge] | Alibaba Cloud US LLC | 9635134 9479472 8938634 9678774 8954993 |
1:21-cv-00960 | Filed | Invincible IP, LLC [IP Edge] | NetApp, Inc. | 9635134 9479472 8938634 9678774 8954993 |
1:21-cv-00962 | Filed | Orbit Licensing LLC [IP Edge] | Tencent America, LLC | 9497035 9578040 |
1:21-cv-01780 | Filed | Fairway IP LLC [IP Edge] | Hitron Technologies America Inc. | 7184405 |
6:21-cv-00689 | Filed | Xylon Licensing LLC [IP Edge] | First National Bank of Bastrop | 8719165 |
6:21-cv-00692 | Filed | Liberty Patents, LLC [Antonelli, Harrington, & Thompson LLP; Jon Rowan] | Lattice Semiconductor Corp. | 8458496 8127156 7509504 |
1:21-cv-00970 | Filed | Internet Media Interactive Corp. | Sightline Media Group, LLC | 6049835 |
1:21-cv-00977 | Filed | Abbott Laboratories Abbott Diabetes Care Limited |
DexCom, Inc. | 10959654 10820842 10945647 10952653 11000216 10973443 10827954 10874338 10966644 10881341 11013440 10945649 |
3:21-cv-13247 | Filed | Auspex Pharms., Inc. Teva Pharmaceutical |
Lupin Limited | 9233959 9814708 9550780 9296739 |
6:21-cv-00695 | Filed | XR Communications, LLC | Microsoft | 10715235 |
4:21-cv-00512 | Filed | Michigan Motor Technologies, LLC [Equitable IP] | Jaguar Land Rover Ltd Tata Motors Ltd. |
6558260 6581565 6736122 6581574 6557540 8909482 |
1:21-cv-00981 | Filed | Astex Therapeutics Ltd Novartis |
MSN LABORATORIES PVT., LTD. MSN Pharmaceuticals Inc. |
9416136 8415355 8685980 8962630 8324225 |
6:21-cv-00679 | Filed | Grecia Estate Holdings LLC [William Grecia] | Starbucks Corporation | 8402555 |
2:21-cv-00234 | Filed | Jabaa, LLC | Foot Locker, Inc. | 7480637 |
1:21-cv-00933 | Filed | Crimson IP LLC [IP Edge] | Truphone, Inc. | 8868070 |
1:21-cv-00938 | Filed | Orbit Licensing LLC [IP Edge] | Akamai Technologies, Inc. | 9497035 9578040 |
1:21-cv-00940 | Filed | Lecrew Licensing LLC [IP Edge] | Bang & Olufsen America, Inc. | 9516370 |
1:21-cv-00947 | Filed | AO Smith Corporation AOS Holding Company |
Rheem Manufacturing Co. | 8375897 |
1:21-cv-00949 | Filed | Orbit Licensing LLC [IP Edge] | Red Hat, Inc. | 8839195 9578040 |
8:21-cv-01568 | Filed | Harmony Licensing LLC [IP Edge] | Roper Technologies, Inc. | RE42219 |
5:21-cv-01260 | Filed | Mellaconic IP LLC [IP Edge] | Genie Company | 9986435 |
6:21-cv-00682 | Filed | BJ Energy Solutions, LLC | EVOLUTION WELL SERVICES, LLC | 9395049 |
6:21-cv-00687 | Filed | The ADT Security Corporation ADT |
Vivion, Inc. | 8976937 9286772 |
2:21-cv-00407 | Filed | Axcess Global Sciences Pruvit Ventures |
New U Life Corp New U Life Disc |
10736861 |
2:21-cv-00241 | Filed | K.Mizra LLC [Ginegar IP, Charles Jourdan Hausman] | AT&T Communications, LLC AT&T, Inc. |
8958819 |
1:21-cv-03507 | Filed | Lecrew Licensing LLC [IP Edge] | Dynaudio North America Inc | 9516370 |
1:21-cv-05685 | Filed | Bobcar Media, LLC | DEUTSCHE TELEKOM AG (d/b/a TMOBILE), T-MOBILE USA, INC., SAMSUNG ELECTRONICS CO. LTD., and SAMSUNG ELECTRONICS AMERICA, INC | D736675 D652353 8220854 8690215 D678823 7942461 |
3:21-cv-00981 | Filed | Cozy Comfort Company LLC | The Coozzy | D859788 D905380 |
5:21-cv-05110 | Filed | Apple | Voip-Pal.com, Inc. | 10880721 8630234 |
1:21-cv-00971 | Filed | Onstream Media Corporation | Kaltura, Inc. | 10694142 9161068 10200648 10848707 10038930 9467728 10674109 |
1:21-cv-03558 | Filed | Shaoyun Wu | Partnerships and Unicorporated Associations Identified on Schedule “A”, The | |
2:21-cv-01147 | Filed | Sansi LED Lighting Incorporated | Lighting Defense Group LLC | 8939608 |
1:21-cv-00616 | Filed | Unirac, Inc. | Ironridge, Inc. Esdec, Inc. |
8128044 7434362 |
2:21-cv-03705 | Filed | Heritage IP LLC [IP Edge] | Cannon, Inc. | 6854067 |
3:21-cv-01550 | Filed | Mcom IP, LLC [Mcom IP Holdings, LLC] | Avaya Holdings Corp. | 8862508 |
6:21-cv-00701 | Filed | Smart Mobile Technologies LLC | Samsung Group | 8472936 8761739 9191083 9756168 9019946 8824434 8442501 8842653 9084291 9614943 9049119 8472937 |
1:21-cv-00913 | Filed | Magnacross [IP Edge] | Cubic Corp | 6917304 |
1:21-cv-00920 | Filed | Stormborn Technologies LLC [IP Edge] | GeoTab, Inc. | RE44199 |
1:21-cv-00922 | Filed | Golden IP LLC [IP Edge] | Rhapsody International, Inc. | 9397627 8755763 |
6:21-cv-00676 | Filed | Digital Cache, LLC [Oso IP, LLC] | Panasonic Corp. | 6851015 |
8:21-cv-01132 | Filed | Hyper Ice, Inc. | Merchsource, LLC | |
1:21-cv-00927 | Filed | Digital Cache, LLC [Oso IP, LLC] | Pure Storage, Inc. | 6851015 |
1:21-cv-00931 | Filed | Crimson IP LLC [IP Edge] | IDEMIA Identity & Security USA, LLC | 8868070 |
1:21-cv-00936 | Filed | Heritage IP LLC [IP Edge] | Gimbal, Inc. | 6854067 |
1:21-cv-00939 | Filed | Lecrew Licensing LLC [IP Edge] | Audio Pro USA, Inc. | 9516370 |
1:21-cv-00943 | Filed | Orbit Licensing LLC [IP Edge] | CodePen, Inc. | 8839195 9578040 |
1:21-cv-00948 | Filed | Orbit Licensing LLC [IP Edge] | Limelight Networks, Inc. | 9497035 9578040 |
1:21-cv-22362 | Filed | Stormborn Technologies LLC [IP Edge] | Skypatrol, LLC, | RE44199 |
1:21-cv-01262 | Filed | Truveris, Inc. | SkySail Concepts, LLC | 10817920 |
6:21-cv-00684 | Filed | Onstream Media Corporation | Haivision Systems, Inc. | |
2:21-cv-00242 | Filed | K.Mizra LLC [Ginegar IP, Charles Jourdan Hausman] | Sprint Corporation T-Mobile |
8958819 |
2:21-cv-00243 | Filed | K.Mizra LLC [Ginegar IP, Charles Jourdan Hausman] | Verizon Communications Cellco Partnership, Inc. |
8958819 |
5:21-cv-00086 | Filed | Bandspeed, LLC | Qorvo, Inc. | 10791565 10999856 10887893 8873500 9883520 6987955 10602528 9379769 8542643 7903608 |
1:21-cv-03503 | Filed | Heritage IP LLC [IP Edge] | Tanita Corp. of America, Inc. | 6854067 |
1:21-cv-00959 | Filed | Invincible IP, LLC [IP Edge] | DigitalOcean, LLC | 9635134 8938634 9678774 |
3:21-cv-13240 | Filed | Auspex Pharms., Inc. Teva Pharmaceutical |
Aurobindo Pharma, Ltd. | 9233959 10959996 9296739 9550780 8524733 9814708 |
6:21-cv-00694 | Filed | XR Communications, LLC | Hewlett-Packard | 10715235 |
1:21-cv-00982 | Filed | AstraZeneca | Alembic | 10183020 |
1:21-cv-00988 | Filed | Bel Power Solutions, Inc. | Monolithic Power Systems, Inc. | 6949916 7456617 7049798 6936999 7000125 7080265 |
6:21-cv-00698 | Filed | Mcom IP, LLC | Diebold Nixdorf, Inc. | 8862508 |
2:21-cv-00896 | Filed | Zunum Aero, Inc. | Safran Electrical & Power, S.A.S. Boeing Safran Helicopter Engines, SASU Safran Corporate Ventures, S.A.S. Safran SA et al. |
|
1:21-cv-00914 | Filed | Magnacross [IP Edge] | Infinite Electronics International, Inc. | 6917304 |
1:21-cv-00918 | Filed | Digi Portal LLC [IP Edge] | Uber Technologies, Inc. | 5983227 9626342 8352854 7171414 7565359 |
1:21-cv-00921 | Filed | Tunnel IP LLC [IP Edge] | Fender Musical Instruments Corporation | 7916877 |
6:21-cv-00677 | Filed | Grecia Estate Holdings, LLC [William Grecia] | Facebook, Inc. | 8402555 |
6:21-cv-00680 | Filed | Flexiworld Technologies, Inc. [Quarterhill f/k/a Wi-Lan] | Roku, Inc. | 11029903 10768871 9042811 10140073 9836259 9965233 |
2:21-cv-00866 | Filed | Swirlate IP LLC [IP Edge] | Zetron, Inc. | 7154961 7567662 |
8:21-cv-01130 | Filed | Centre One | Lumen Technologies, Inc. fka Centurylink, Inc. a Louisiana corporation | 8724643 7486667 |
1:21-cv-00937 | Filed | Heritage IP LLC [IP Edge] | VivaChek Laboratories, Inc. | 6854067 |
1:21-cv-00944 | Filed | Mellaconic IP LLC [IP Edge] | Canary Connect, Inc. | 9986435 |
6:21-cv-00685 | Filed | Bluestone Ventures Inc. | Uber Technologies, Inc. | 9921077 10502583 |
2:21-cv-00240 | Filed | Orange Electronic Co. Ltd. | Autel Intelligent Technology Corp., Ltd. | 8031064 |
2:21-cv-13177 | Filed | Astellas US LLC Medivation LLC Medivation Prostate Therapeutics LLC Astellas Pharma The Regents of the University Of California |
Sandoz | 7709517 8183274 |
1:21-cv-05691 | Filed | Orbit Licensing LLC [IP Edge] | EidosMedia, Inc. | 8839195 9578040 |
1:21-cv-03705 | Filed | Heritage IP LLC [IP Edge] | Cannon, Inc. | 6854067 |
6:21-cv-00691 | Filed | Xylon Licensing LLC [IP Edge] | Amarillo National Bank | 8719165 |
6:21-cv-00693 | Filed | Liberty Patents, LLC [Antonelli, Harrington & Tohmpson, LLC; Jon Rowan] | NXP USA, Inc. DBA NXP Semiconductors USA, Inc. NXP NXP Semiconductors |
8458496 8127156 7509504 |
1:21-cv-00969 | Filed | Novartis | Micro Labs | 8927574 7314938 8168655 8367701 7928122 7745460 9447077 9353088 7790743 9216174 9085553 9890141 10124000 8592450 8084047 |
3:21-cv-13219 | Filed | Endobotics, LLC | Medtronic, Inc. Medtronic |
7648519 8083765 7147650 8105350 |
8:21-cv-01595 | Filed | 2BCom, LLC [Markman Advisors] | Digi International, Inc. | 6885643 7876736 6928166 7251237 7460477 |
4:21-mc-80157 | Filed | Garrity Power Services | Samsung Group | |
3:21-cv-13320 | Filed | Orexo US, Inc.; Orexo | Sun Pharmaceuticals Industries Limited Sun Pharmaceutical |
10874661 10946010 |
1:21-cv-11098 | Filed | Blue Engine Biologics, LLC | Arteriocyte Medical Systems, Inc. | 6811777 9320762 8741282 |
6:21-cv-00696 | Filed | Carolyn W. Hafeman | LG Corp. | 9021610 9672388 10325122 10789393 9390296 9892287 |
Image Source: Deposit Photos
Copyright: gunnar3000
Image ID: 3834376
Join the Discussion
18 comments so far.
mike
July 13, 2021 09:58 amI’ll also second Mr. Morinville.
Paul Morinville
July 12, 2021 01:36 pm“I’m assuming these commenters are equally angry with the way IP Edge filed almost 50 complaints for file-and-settle litigation in the same week.”
Yes. I am angry that they were forced to sue. If patents were presumed valid, hard to invalidate, and earned injunctive relief, the infringers would have licensed the IP long before going to court, and probably before any infringement started.
mike
July 12, 2021 01:29 pmAs you well know Jonathan, the only reason patent owners like IP Edge have to resort to filing suits at all is because the large majority of infringing companies in the large majority of cases refuse to negotiate in good faith for a licenses.
I’ll second that. And everything else Pro Say, Curious, and Anon have said here.
Curious
July 12, 2021 12:43 amIt’s interesting that one LLC doing exactly what literally hundreds of LLCs do in the district court each month provokes such outrage.
Exactly? You and I must be working with a different definition because what they are doing is hardly identical to what is happening in the district courts.
If this one LLC files a frivolous IPR request and that gets denied, what happens? They’ll get their substantial filing fee back and the patentee loses money defending it. However, here is little to prevent another anonymous LLC from filing something similar. That is my point — there is no finality in this process.
In contrast, if the patent owner sues and the district court determines there was no infringement, once the appeal process is over, the patentee doesn’t get a do-over. There is finality.
I’m assuming these commenters are equally angry with the way IP Edge filed almost 50 complaints for file-and-settle litigation in the same week.
Were the defendants infringing? What is the problem with these complaints then? BTW, what is YOUR problem with that? The more people get sued, the more business you get. You are an umbrella salesman complaining about the rain.
Or is that different because of which side of the V they fall at the Board?
The difference is the lack of finality at the Board. You may care only about who has the deep pockets to pay your bills, but there are those of us who care about individual inventors and small companies who get railroaded by infringer-enablers like yourself and those you represent.
I know you have a vested interest in protecting the tools of your trade, but try to come up with some better arguments. Many may be idealistic, but we aren’t a bunch of rubes here.
As you well know Jonathan, the only reason patent owners like IP Edge have to resort to filing suits at all is because the large majority of infringing companies in the large majority of cases refuse to negotiate in good faith for a licenses.
Truth.
Anon
July 11, 2021 11:32 amMr. Stroud,
In addition to the point by Pro Say (a solid point, by the way), your question BEGS the notion that it is a strict ‘bad’ to even want to enforce one’s property rights.
It is a red herring that there is any “and settle,” as THAT is firmly within the providence of the system — as set up — to resolve property right disputes.
Further, the acrimony you see is NOT because there is a ‘V’ in any instance, but because the Efficient Infringer mantra (and their propaganda) have become so pervasive that the first leaning when it comes to IP (even by those like you – if we want to be generous) by the ‘general public’ IS that the holder of the patent must be up to something nefarious.
It is perfectly legitimate for a business entity to set themselves TO BE the putative “Tr011.”
The notion of that very same “Tr011” is the very mechanism that helped derail the omnibus war chest gathering of Big Corp – and is something to be celebrated, not denigrated.
It is ‘seemingly innocuous’ quips like yours that are often the insidious purveyors of propaganda that lead to a mindset of “patents are bad.”
Pro Say
July 11, 2021 09:24 am“IP Edge filed almost 50 complaints for file-and-settle litigation in the same week.”
As you well know Jonathan, the only reason patent owners like IP Edge have to resort to filing suits at all is because the large majority of infringing companies in the large majority of cases refuse to negotiate in good faith for a licenses.
So no; we commenters are not — because we have no reason to be — equally angry with companies like IP Edge filing complaints.
Jonathan Stroud
July 11, 2021 09:05 amIt’s interesting that one LLC doing exactly what literally hundreds of LLCs do in the district court each month provokes such outrage. I’m assuming these commenters are equally angry with the way IP Edge filed almost 50 complaints for file-and-settle litigation in the same week. Or is that different because of which side of the V they fall at the Board?
Anon
July 10, 2021 11:05 pmCurious,
Interesting points, but whether or not institution was granted is outside of your power to contest, is it not?
Also, whether or not they are here to stay very much depends on the subsequent fights (not YET fought), eh?
Pro Say
July 10, 2021 09:55 pm“IPRs are here to stay”
When SCOTUS itself is unwilling to eliminate the Death Squad PTAB . . . even after they’ve admitted that it’s unconstitutional . . . Curious is, sadly and unfortunately for American innovation, likely correct.
Now the scalpel necessary to remove the PTAB cancer is solely in the hands of Congress.
Do they have the courage to wield it in order to save the patient?
Curious
July 10, 2021 07:25 pmCurious, won’t work. APJs are told their job is to invalidate.
I’ve won at the PTAB — we were small and they were big. As such, I know that not everything get invalidated.
Therefore they will copy/paste “we are persuaded by petitioner’s [hired] expert that it would have been obvious to combine [x, y, and z prior art familiar to examiner and inventor]”. Your proposal does not solve for this typical case.
My approach isn’t about addressing the law of obviousness. That is another issue for another day. My approach is to address how the lack of finality in the IPR system is being abused.
If “x, y, and z prior art [is] familiar to [the] examiner,” then perhaps institution could be denied for lack of “a substantial new question of patentability.” I want to avoid litigating the same issue over and over again — fishing for a “right” result from a panel at the Board and/or the courts. If the new prior art being cited isn’t different than the old prior art (as to the relied upon portions), then institution shouldn’t be granted.
Institution should only be granted:
1) for new art — substantively DIFFERENT than the old art,
2) only once per infringer, and
3) only for accused infringers.
Maybe you want to start the negotiations by advocating for allowing only 102 rejections but giving that away to further negotiations. However, IPR are here to stay.
Paul Morinville
July 9, 2021 06:48 pmLitig8or, I thought the AIA was passed because SMEs were being targeted by “trolls”. It’s not? Did Leahy and Smith lie to us?
Or perhaps that was the case then and now they only target huge global corps. Then of course, the AIA must be a great success.
Paul Morinville
July 9, 2021 06:44 pmAnon @4. I was told that the reason for AIA’s creation of the PTAB was to help SMEs with a lower cost alternative to litigation. I just thought I might find one, just one, SME filing a petition.
So am I surprised. Well, no. I’m not. Because the AIA was not promoted by SMEs. It was promoted by huge global corporations.
Litig8or
July 9, 2021 06:05 pmNo sh** Sherlock, because those are the companies that the trolls target on the reg
Josh Malone
July 9, 2021 04:09 pm@Curious, won’t work. APJs are told their job is to invalidate. Therefore they will copy/paste “we are persuaded by petitioner’s [hired] expert that it would have been obvious to combine [x, y, and z prior art familiar to examiner and inventor]”. Your proposal does not solve for this typical case.
Anon
July 9, 2021 04:05 pmMr. Morinville,
Are you surprised?
Curious
July 9, 2021 03:27 pmSecond Mystery Entity Files IPR on VLSI Patents: A second unknown LLC of recent vintage has filed an IPR challenge against the patents that formed the basis of the recent $2.18 billion judgment against Intel in Judge Albright’s court. The first, OpenSky, LLC, effectively copied earlier challenges by Intel—ones denied under Fintiv for a trial date that was pushed back but eventually led to the judgment. This second, Patent Quality Assurance, LLC, appears to be tied to Austin-area former Baker Botts lawyers, but is of murky origin. The petition purports to fix problems with the OpenSky petition (namely, the retention of different testifying experts) and begs institution over the other. Motivations remain murky, but one can imagine the value attached to having the Office hear the challenge on the merits.
This exemplifies the problem with the current IPR system. Intel loses at the PTAB and some “mystery entity” comes and attempts a do-over. If VLSI loses at the PTAB or in Federal Court, it is over. There is finality. The simple problem is that there is no finality with the PTAB.
Mystery entities can keep popping up — forcing patent owners to defend and defend and defend until either they get a panel sympathetic to the arguments being presented or the patent owner runs out of money. While the second approach may not work against large companies, it is exceptionally effective against smaller entities.
As I have written many times, a small entity owning a valuable patent is oftentimes a negative-value asset — you’ll get thrown into the PTAB so much that you’ll pay more in legal fees than what you’ll get in licensing fees.
Any reform of the IPR system (and no, the IPR system isn’t going to get dispensed with altogether so focus your efforts on something realistic) should only permit a patent to be challenged a very limited amount of times and/or only by entities being accused of patent infringement. Moreover, anyone challenging a patent using the IPR system should be precluded from subsequently challenging the same patent (based upon prior art) in Federal Court.
The IPR system was intended to be a cost-effective way to resolve validity issues. That’s not what is happening. Rather, the IPR system is being used by infringers to bludgeon patent owners into submission.
Someone accused of patent infringement should be able to take advantage of the (supposed) cost of the IPR system. However, if that is the path the choose, they give up the right to challenge that same patent in Federal Court. Otherwise, the cost-effectiveness disappears. It is up to defendants to choose what approach they take. However, once they’ve chosen one path, they should be precluded from choosing the other path as well — no two bites of the apple.
This is how I would reform the IPR system:
1) retain presumption of validity of patents (this means a higher burden in order to invalidate)
2) only defendants sued for patent infringement can employ the IPR system
3) defendants get to choose whether they will use the court or the IPR system to invalidate based upon 102/103.
4) once defendant selects one approach, they cannot select the other
5) prior decisions on same art/issues (either by Federal Court or by the PTAB) are binding precedent (i.e., no relitigating the same issue in different forums).
6) institution should be based upon a substantial new question of patentability (i.e., the same standard as ex parte reexamination — again, no relitigating prior issues)
This approach gives defendants a way to (supposedly) cheaply address validity issues. However, it also protects the rights of patent holders from the abuses that are prevalent today.
Paul Morinville
July 9, 2021 01:36 pmI could not find a single PTAB petitioned by a small or medium company. All are large corporations and most are global multinationals.
Josh Malone
July 9, 2021 08:42 amPTAB carnage continues.